心血管疾病研究员中的姑息治疗教育:全国项目主任调查。

IF 6.7 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Journal of Cardiac Failure Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-13 DOI:10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.03.008
Sarah Godfrey, Jill M Steiner, Abdulla A Damluji, Ramya Sampath, Sarah Chuzi, Haider Warraich, Ashok Krishnaswami, Gwen Bernacki, Sarah Goodlin, Richard Josephson, John Mulrow, Caroline Doherty
{"title":"心血管疾病研究员中的姑息治疗教育:全国项目主任调查。","authors":"Sarah Godfrey, Jill M Steiner, Abdulla A Damluji, Ramya Sampath, Sarah Chuzi, Haider Warraich, Ashok Krishnaswami, Gwen Bernacki, Sarah Goodlin, Richard Josephson, John Mulrow, Caroline Doherty","doi":"10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.03.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Palliative care (PC) is an essential component of high-quality care for people with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, little is known about the current state of PC education in CVD training, including attitudes toward integration of PC into training and implementation of PC by the program's leadership.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a nationwide, cross-sectional survey that queried education approaches, perspectives and barriers to PC education in general CVD fellowship training. The survey was distributed to 392 members of the American College of Cardiology Program Director (PD) listserv, representing 290 general CVD fellowships between 1/2023 and 4/2023. We performed descriptive and ꭕ<sup>2</sup> analyses of survey data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the program's representatives, 56 completed the survey (response rate = 19.3%). Respondents identified themselves as current PDs (89%), associate PDs (8.9%) or former PDs (1.8%), representing a diverse range of program sizes and types and regions of the country. Respondents reported the use of informal bedside teaching (88%), formal didactics (59%), online or self-paced modules (13%), in-person simulation (11%), and clinical rotations (16%) to teach PC content. Most programs covered PC topics at least annually, although there was variability by topic. We found no associations between program demographics and type or frequency of PC education. Most respondents reported dissatisfaction with the quantity (62%) or quality (59%) of the PC education provided. Barriers to PC education included an overabundance of other content to cover (36%) and perceived lack of fellow (20%) or faculty (18%) interest. Comments demonstrated the importance of PC education in fellowship, the lack of a requirement to provide PC education, difficulty in covering all topics, and suggestions of how PC skills should be taught.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a national survey of CVD educational leadership concerning approaches to PC education in CVD training, respondents highlighted both challenges to implementation of formal PC curricula in cardiology training and opportunities for comprehensive PC education.</p>","PeriodicalId":15204,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Failure","volume":" ","pages":"1583-1591"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11470968/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Palliative Care Education in Cardiovascular Disease Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Godfrey, Jill M Steiner, Abdulla A Damluji, Ramya Sampath, Sarah Chuzi, Haider Warraich, Ashok Krishnaswami, Gwen Bernacki, Sarah Goodlin, Richard Josephson, John Mulrow, Caroline Doherty\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.03.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Palliative care (PC) is an essential component of high-quality care for people with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, little is known about the current state of PC education in CVD training, including attitudes toward integration of PC into training and implementation of PC by the program's leadership.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a nationwide, cross-sectional survey that queried education approaches, perspectives and barriers to PC education in general CVD fellowship training. The survey was distributed to 392 members of the American College of Cardiology Program Director (PD) listserv, representing 290 general CVD fellowships between 1/2023 and 4/2023. We performed descriptive and ꭕ<sup>2</sup> analyses of survey data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the program's representatives, 56 completed the survey (response rate = 19.3%). Respondents identified themselves as current PDs (89%), associate PDs (8.9%) or former PDs (1.8%), representing a diverse range of program sizes and types and regions of the country. Respondents reported the use of informal bedside teaching (88%), formal didactics (59%), online or self-paced modules (13%), in-person simulation (11%), and clinical rotations (16%) to teach PC content. Most programs covered PC topics at least annually, although there was variability by topic. We found no associations between program demographics and type or frequency of PC education. Most respondents reported dissatisfaction with the quantity (62%) or quality (59%) of the PC education provided. Barriers to PC education included an overabundance of other content to cover (36%) and perceived lack of fellow (20%) or faculty (18%) interest. Comments demonstrated the importance of PC education in fellowship, the lack of a requirement to provide PC education, difficulty in covering all topics, and suggestions of how PC skills should be taught.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a national survey of CVD educational leadership concerning approaches to PC education in CVD training, respondents highlighted both challenges to implementation of formal PC curricula in cardiology training and opportunities for comprehensive PC education.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiac Failure\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1583-1591\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11470968/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiac Failure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.03.008\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Failure","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2024.03.008","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:姑息关怀(PC)是高质量心血管疾病(CVD)护理的重要组成部分。然而,人们对心血管疾病培训中姑息治疗教育的现状知之甚少,包括项目领导层对将姑息治疗纳入培训和实施的态度:我们在全国范围内开展了一项横断面调查,询问普通心血管病研究员培训中的 PC 教育方法、观点和障碍。调查问卷于 2023 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 4 月 4 日期间发放给美国心脏病学院项目主任 (PD) 列表服务器的 392 名成员,他们代表了 290 个普通心血管病研究员培训项目。我们对调查数据进行了描述性分析和卡方分析:56名项目代表完成了调查(回复率=19.3%)。受访者的身份包括现任临床医师(89%)、副临床医师(8.9%)和前任临床医师(1.8%),代表了国内不同的项目规模、类型和地区。受访者称,他们使用非正式床旁教学(88%)、正式教学(59%)、在线或自定进度模块(13%)、现场模拟(11%)和临床轮转(16%)来教授 PC 内容。大多数项目至少每年都会涉及 PC 主题,但不同主题之间存在差异。我们发现,项目人口统计与 PC 教育的类型或频率之间没有关联。大多数受访者对 PC 教育的数量(62%)或质量(59%)表示不满。开展 PC 教育的障碍包括其他内容过多(36%)以及研究人员(20%)或教师(18%)缺乏兴趣。评论显示了 PC 教育在研究员培训中的重要性,缺乏提供 PC 教育的要求,难以涵盖所有主题,以及关于如何教授 PC 技能的建议:在一项针对心血管病培训中 PC 教育方法的全国心血管病教育领导力调查中,受访者强调了在心脏病学培训中实施正规 PC 课程所面临的挑战以及开展全面 PC 教育的机遇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Palliative Care Education in Cardiovascular Disease Fellowships: A National Survey of Program Directors.

Background: Palliative care (PC) is an essential component of high-quality care for people with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, little is known about the current state of PC education in CVD training, including attitudes toward integration of PC into training and implementation of PC by the program's leadership.

Methods: We developed a nationwide, cross-sectional survey that queried education approaches, perspectives and barriers to PC education in general CVD fellowship training. The survey was distributed to 392 members of the American College of Cardiology Program Director (PD) listserv, representing 290 general CVD fellowships between 1/2023 and 4/2023. We performed descriptive and ꭕ2 analyses of survey data.

Results: Of the program's representatives, 56 completed the survey (response rate = 19.3%). Respondents identified themselves as current PDs (89%), associate PDs (8.9%) or former PDs (1.8%), representing a diverse range of program sizes and types and regions of the country. Respondents reported the use of informal bedside teaching (88%), formal didactics (59%), online or self-paced modules (13%), in-person simulation (11%), and clinical rotations (16%) to teach PC content. Most programs covered PC topics at least annually, although there was variability by topic. We found no associations between program demographics and type or frequency of PC education. Most respondents reported dissatisfaction with the quantity (62%) or quality (59%) of the PC education provided. Barriers to PC education included an overabundance of other content to cover (36%) and perceived lack of fellow (20%) or faculty (18%) interest. Comments demonstrated the importance of PC education in fellowship, the lack of a requirement to provide PC education, difficulty in covering all topics, and suggestions of how PC skills should be taught.

Conclusions: In a national survey of CVD educational leadership concerning approaches to PC education in CVD training, respondents highlighted both challenges to implementation of formal PC curricula in cardiology training and opportunities for comprehensive PC education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cardiac Failure
Journal of Cardiac Failure 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
653
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Cardiac Failure publishes original, peer-reviewed communications of scientific excellence and review articles on clinical research, basic human studies, animal studies, and bench research with potential clinical applications to heart failure - pathogenesis, etiology, epidemiology, pathophysiological mechanisms, assessment, prevention, and treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信